Civility In Twelve Angry Men

His own son hasn’t seen him in years and he want to take out his anger on whoever he can, which just so happens to be the kid on trial. Juror Three’s feelings led him to be prejudice against the kid on trial. At the very end, he becomes visibly upset and give his final verdict, not

Juror 3 was intimidating the other jurors, trying to convince them to stick with the guilty verdict. Juror 2 was guilty of self-censorship agreeing with the rest of the group to influence his decisions. The whole group began with the illusion of unanimity. According to Janis illusion of unanimity is, “the majority view and judgments are assumed to be unanimous.” (Psysr.org,

People act upon what they think. Within “12 Angry Men”, all of the jurors have an opinion but some voice their more than others. One juror in particular, Juror Ten, voices his opinion about the boy in question. Repeatedly throughout the play, Juror Ten makes many thoughtless and hurtful comments about a certain kind of people. It is clear that Juror Ten’s uncompromising belief that the accused is guilty is because of his dislike for the boy’s race.

Eventually, the votes of the eleven jurors are converted by convincing speech and peer pressure. Therefore, they made a not-guilty decision. Twelve Angry Men emphasize social psychology theories in the fields of conformity, eye-witness testimony, schemas and heuristics, attitude change (persuation and social influence) and group process (polarization).

Moreover, when everyone decided that the boy is guilty, he suggested that they should talk about it first. Furthermore, he said that he didn 't

Then, surprisingly, at the end, a Cunningham made the jury hesitate while they were taking their decision which supports that the Cunninghams, just like everyone, can be both good and

During the trial Adnan said that, “The prosecution did a masterful job of presenting the facts,” and he also said that Miss Gutierrez did not have a clear outline (Episode 10). Everything was jumbled and she took so long to question witnesses and cross-examine people. Even people on the jury said that “Christina’s strategy was a little lost on them too.” Christina had also been slipping in her work for awhile and kept taking on cases and work that she could not do.

3x5: Clarke and Bellamy 's Argument A lot of people are upset about Clarke and Bellamy 's scene in 3x5 when Clarke sneaks into Arkadia to talk to Bellamy. The main thing I 've seen is people calling Bellamy abusive when he yelled at Clarke about her leaving them, him bringing up "things of the past", and him playing her emotions before handcuffing her to the table to bring her to Pike. While I agree with others that that move was wrong and manipulative, I 'm curious as to why everyone is so hell bent on Bellamy suppressing his emotions, especially when everything he said was true. It doesn 't matter that Clarke was over it, that she put it in the past, becase Clarke isn 't the only person that matters. Problems don 't just disappear for

This is because Danforth feels that if he is lenient with his decisions, it looks as though he is weak and being unfair to the rest who did not get postponed. Since Danforth has authority over the rest of the court, John Proctor is later executed due to Danforth signature. Additionally, he uses the number of cases he has had in court and the amount he has put in jail as a number to hold over peoples heads. The number Danforth claims is a point of trying to scare those who may being lying and show that Danforth is merciless. He tells the open court, “And do you know that near to four hundred are in the jails from Marblehead to Lynn, and upon my signature?”(81).

Men in both The Crucible and in Twelve Angry Men were angry because of the situations placed upon them. Juror three’s bad relationship with his son was reminded to him during this case, angering him. Infuriated with the claims that Salem was impure, the court sought to eliminate anyone associated with it. Many convicted of witchcraft were either poor or of a minority group. Likewise, the boy was of a minority group, people who are viewed as inferior.

So, in all the moment where reads his last rule that lets him lie makes him wonder if all the adults have lied to him his entire life even though he’s been taught all these years to do the opposite because it was such an integral part of precise speech. I

The main priority is to discuss the defendant’s innocence or guilt. By keeping the subject of discussion on the boy, Juror Eight, has an easier time convincing the rest of the jury that he is not guilty of the murder of his father. Juror Three, the main antagonist of Twelve Angry Men, doesn’t possess the perseverance that Juror Eight does. Juror Three doesn’t have a reasonable cause, which in turn weakens his argument. His bottled up emotions over his son become a problem later in the play when

​Jennifer Siebel Newsom’s Miss Representation successfully conveys the dangers that are associated with the demeaning methods the media uses to displace women from inspiring, valued positions and the effects of it on the American female population. The documentary explores the negative portrayal of women in the press and Hollywood, lack of female participation in major fields, and the side effects of the antifeminist movements on impressionable, young girls that have become highly visible through the media. The documentary reports of how even the most casual hints of misogyny distort the public’s values and expectations for women. The targeted audience is everyone because society can only right its wrongs by working and empowering together. However, Miss Representation does emphasize that young women in particular were the most important group of their intended audience.

One reason was because a vast majority of the people accused were family and friends of other people. These people began to question the righteousness of the court and felt that innocent people were being executed. The main reason for the end of the trials was, because the accusations soon became too bold. In the beginning, people of low class were being accused, making it seem more believable. As the hunt continued, accusations were aimed at higher classed people.

By criticizing her “girliness” he was essentially telling her she was incapable of participating, and Scout was even more fired up to prove the boys wrong. Scout attempted to break this mold by “fitting in” right along the boys, and having fun. The story line elucidates how women were treated as second class citizens, during this period of time. In conclusion, the book depicts race and ethnicity as enormous issues that impact our society.